| Study | Reason for exclusion |
|---|---|
| Amelina 2014 | No randomisation. Despite what is inferred by abstract, after translation of the full paper there is no evidence or comment made as regards randomisation. |
| Borka 2012 | Study considers comparing treatment sequence, when broken down into individual treatment options it is a single intervention study. |
| Cantin 2005 | Use of the frequencer which is not a therapy modality for comparison. |
| Cegla 1993 | Only one participant with CF involved in the study, therefore no comparable participants relevant to this review. |
| Clinkscale 2012 | No comparable participants identified. |
| Dosman 2003 | Single‐intervention study. |
| Dunn 2013 | Single‐intervention study. |
| Dwyer 2017 | Single‐intervention study. |
| Elkins 2004 | Single‐intervention study. In addition uses non‐invasive ventilation which was not in our inclusion characteristics as a therapy modality for comparison. |
| Elkins 2005 | Single‐dose comparison study. |
| Fainardi 2011 | Single‐intervention study. |
| Grosse‐Onnebrink 2017 | Single‐intervention study. |
| Hartsell 1978 | Single‐dose comparison study. Uses a mechanical percussor which we have not formally included. Some of the study participants did not have CF. |
| Jarad 2010 | HAT is not a recognised airway clearance technique and therefore not in our inclusion criteria. In particular we stated that external oscillation applied to the chest wall should have an effect on expiratory airflow. This is not the case with HAT and consequently should not be judged as an airway clearance adjunct. |
| Kempainen 2007 | Single intervention and comparison made with HFCWO and different pressures and variable frequencies. |
| Kirkpatrick 1995 | Use of acoustic percussion, not a therapy we have chosen to compare as not inclusive of oscillation therapy as a comparator. |
| Konstan 1994 | After careful consideration of the methodology of the paper it was considered to be comparing single interventions only. |
| Kraemer 1996 | Evaluating a bronchodilator (beta2‐inhalation therapy) in sequence with flutter. This did not evaluate an oscillatory device with another form of ACT. |
| Lagerkvist 2006 | Single‐dose comparative study. Also principally looking at blood gases, tensions and RFTs were an aside. |
| Leemans 2018 | Evaluated the mobile vest compared to the standard vest. There were no other differences therefore it was felt that the comparators were not something we intended to evaluate. |
| Lindemann 1992 | Single‐dose comparison study. |
| Majaesic 1996 | Outcome measure is sputum viscosity, which is not one of our outcome measures. |
| Marks 1998 | Single‐dose comparison study. |
| Marks 2004 | Single‐dose comparison study. |
| McCarren 2006 | Single‐dose comparison study. Physiological effects of vibration is not an outcome measure of the review. |
| Morris 1982 | Use of mechanical percussor, which is not in the inclusion criteria for therapies to be compared. |
| Natale 1994 | Comparison of 3 treatment techniques, but only single doses of each. |
| NCT01923753 | Not using a treatment modality that we are currently evaluating. |
| NCT02600039 | Not using a treatment modality that we are currently evaluating, also outcomes are not eligible for our inclusion. |
| NCT03261219 | Study was withdrawn without any recruitment. |
| Newhouse 1998 | Single‐dose study. |
| O'Neil 2017 | Both groups received same oscillating device regimen, difference between groups was the timing of administration of hypertonic saline. |
| Orlik 2000a | CCT not RCT or quasi‐RCT. |
| Orlik 2000b | CCT not RCT or quasi‐RCT. |
| Orlik 2001 | CCT not RCT or quasi‐RCT. |
| Radtke 2018 | Single intervention. |
| Roos 1987 | Study was not completed when abstract was published. Authors were contacted but they were unable to provide us with any data to support this or any subsequently related study. |
| Salh 1989 | Assessing exercise for sputum clearance but not compared with oscillatory therapies. |
| Scherer 1998 | Single‐dose study. |
| Skopnik 1986 | Use of 'Knock and Vibration' therapy, which is not part of our review inclusion criteria. |
| Stites 2006 | Single‐dose comparison and outcome measure of drug deposition whilst using the device rather than evaluating it as an airway clearance system. |
| Van Ginderdeuren 2008 | Single‐dose study. |
| Webber 1984 | Self‐percussor, not in criteria for comparison as not oscillatory. |
ACT: airway clearance technique CF: cystic fibrosis HAT: hydro‐acoustic therapy RFT: respiratory function test